🛣 Headlines About California Highways – June 2022

[cahwyguy]

It's been a month, and I've been busy with other stuff I haven't done much highway related. But I have collected headlines, so read the headlines at the link below, and "Ready, Set, Discuss"...

Headlines About California Highways - June 2022

Daniel

[pderocco]

It looks like a new Pit River Bridge over Lake Shasta would leave the existing bridge to carry trains. This makes sense because at its southern end, the track goes directly into a long tunnel, which would be difficult to reroute.

It's not surprising that this would be coming up now, since they only recently replaced the Lakehead Bridge over the upper Sacramento River.

[M3100]

Here's a pic of the Pit River Bridge from summer 2020; the haze is from the lightning-caused wildfires that were widespread that year. This pic was taken from the deck of the Cook House restaurant; inside the restaurant they have several construction pictures of the Shasta Dam.

[Max Rockatansky]

The Pit River Bridge is by Interstate standards functionally obsolete.  The approach angle sharp by Interstate standards the road deck is surprising narrow and contains no shoulders:

IMG_6354 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

All the same, I like the design alternate which depicts a vintage style suspension bridge.

[Max Rockatansky]

I might check out construction of the CA 25/CA 156 roundabout on my next work trip to Monterey provided I can stomach not taking CA 198...

That Golden Gate Freeway technical guide was a total gem to find.  I'll probably be bumping that up my priority list to write up something for a blog entry for August.

[skluth]

I'm confused by the need for run-through tracks at Union Station much less raising the entire train platform. That's a ton of money to install something that saves 2-3 minutes at most for trains to/from the south instead of using the current configuration. I'm not opposed to station upgrades and having used Union Station last month for the first time I can see improvements are needed. But this seems more boondoggle than needed improvements.

[cahwyguy]

Oops. When I logged into work this morning, I discovered a bunch of bookmarks from May and June didn't sync. So I had to do an update headline post. Here are the headlines I missed:

🛣 Headlines About California Highways — June 2022 Supplemental

This is in addition to Headlines About California Highways - June 2022 that I posted a few days ago.

Please continue your discussion.

It's been a month, and I've been busy with other stuff I haven't done much highway related. But I have collected headlines, so read the headlines at the link below, and "Ready, Set, Discuss"...

Headlines About California Highways - June 2022

Daniel

[heynow415]

I'm confused by the need for run-through tracks at Union Station much less raising the entire train platform. That's a ton of money to install something that saves 2-3 minutes at most for trains to/from the south instead of using the current configuration. I'm not opposed to station upgrades and having used Union Station last month for the first time I can see improvements are needed. But this seems more boondoggle than needed improvements.

If LA was the end of the line, the current layout would make sense, e.g. trains coming from the east terminating at Union Station.  But deadheading in the middle of a route is really inefficient and logistically challenging in the railroad world. With long-haul passenger services primarily running north-south (Coast Starlight, Surfliner, HSR(?), plus Metrolink, Union Station is in the middle of the action.  Unlike with a car where one pulls off the road into a parking lot, does their thing and then backs out and gets back on the road, with a train pulling into a "parking space" backing it out onto the mainline creates issues with the blocking/signalling, even more so when the tracks are shared with freight.  Even if the train can run with the locomotive in the rear it's not as simple as throwing it in reverse and off you go.  With through tracks the train pulls in, loads/unloads, and continues on its way without needing make the equivalent of a 3 point turn on rails and shifting the crew around.  In the passenger rail (and bus) business, dwell time can be a killer, particularly when your competition is the private vehicle.  With Union Station being a major hub both now and with future usage projections it's probably worthwhile to address this now if they're going to be doing major work on the station anyway.   

[skluth]

I'm confused by the need for run-through tracks at Union Station much less raising the entire train platform. That's a ton of money to install something that saves 2-3 minutes at most for trains to/from the south instead of using the current configuration. I'm not opposed to station upgrades and having used Union Station last month for the first time I can see improvements are needed. But this seems more boondoggle than needed improvements.

If LA was the end of the line, the current layout would make sense, e.g. trains coming from the east terminating at Union Station.  But deadheading in the middle of a route is really inefficient and logistically challenging in the railroad world. With long-haul passenger services primarily running north-south (Coast Starlight, Surfliner, HSR(?), plus Metrolink, Union Station is in the middle of the action.  Unlike with a car where one pulls off the road into a parking lot, does their thing and then backs out and gets back on the road, with a train pulling into a "parking space" backing it out onto the mainline creates issues with the blocking/signalling, even more so when the tracks are shared with freight.  Even if the train can run with the locomotive in the rear it's not as simple as throwing it in reverse and off you go.  With through tracks the train pulls in, loads/unloads, and continues on its way without needing make the equivalent of a 3 point turn on rails and shifting the crew around.  In the passenger rail (and bus) business, dwell time can be a killer, particularly when your competition is the private vehicle.  With Union Station being a major hub both now and with future usage projections it's probably worthwhile to address this now if they're going to be doing major work on the station anyway.   

I think I'm confused because it's common for passenger trains to work with a push-and/or-pull system. With fully electric trains and especially HSR, it's common for every car to also be part of the system that propels the train and the driver simply moves from the cab at one end of the train to the other end. I understand it's useful for through trains, but I question the cost vs benefit of physically elevating the entire platform for this when the only route that does not currently end at Union Station is the Pacific Surfliner.  Amtrak's schedule only shows two Surfliner trains through Union Station daily each way; I think Amtrak's drivers can walk the platform length four times daily. I don't know of any Metrolink trains that currently pass through Union Station rather than terminate there. It would be useful to ride (for example) from Palmdale to the OC without switching trains at Union Station, but I haven't heard any discussion about such routing.

It's possible that Metrolink trains don't work push/pull. That would be incredibly short-sighted by their management given their system layout, but I've seen enough transit management screwups that I wouldn't be surprised.

[bigdave]

An enjoyable read as always, many thanks!

[M3100]

Amtrak's schedule only shows two Surfliner trains through Union Station daily each way; I think Amtrak's drivers can walk the platform length four times daily. I don't know of any Metrolink trains that currently pass through Union Station rather than terminate there. It would be useful to ride (for example) from Palmdale to the OC without switching trains at Union Station, but I haven't heard any discussion about such routing.

It's possible that Metrolink trains don't work push/pull. That would be incredibly short-sighted by their management given their system layout, but I've seen enough transit management screwups that I wouldn't be surprised.

The run-through tracks would enable additional run-through capacity, including by Metrolink, which as you correctly note does not currently have run-through service.  Each platform would open up more quickly if a train did not have to back out the way it came; the station access tracks are a bottleneck of sorts.  Run through tracks would enable more through-LA services.

[skluth]

Amtrak's schedule only shows two Surfliner trains through Union Station daily each way; I think Amtrak's drivers can walk the platform length four times daily. I don't know of any Metrolink trains that currently pass through Union Station rather than terminate there. It would be useful to ride (for example) from Palmdale to the OC without switching trains at Union Station, but I haven't heard any discussion about such routing.

It's possible that Metrolink trains don't work push/pull. That would be incredibly short-sighted by their management given their system layout, but I've seen enough transit management screwups that I wouldn't be surprised.

The run-through tracks would enable additional run-through capacity, including by Metrolink, which as you correctly note does not currently have run-through service.  Each platform would open up more quickly if a train did not have to back out the way it came; the station access tracks are a bottleneck of sorts.  Run through tracks would enable more through-LA services.

Thanks for the added explanation. I think I understand this better now between your and heynow415's replies.

[GaryA]

It's possible that Metrolink trains don't work push/pull. That would be incredibly short-sighted by their management given their system layout, but I've seen enough transit management screwups that I wouldn't be surprised.

I believe Metrolink trains can run push/pull, but they prefer to avoid the "push" configuration whenever possible since a 2005 crash in Glendale where a train struck an SUV and jackknifed/derailed, and it was (in the public mind, at least) aggravated by having passengers at the front of the train with the heavy engine pushing from the rear.